A nonprofit corporation’s actions are authorized if they are not clearly unrelated to its purpose, or prohibited by law, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said in a decision allowing the Philadelphia Fraternal Order of Police’s benefits administrator to spend money endorsing a candidate for the union’s president.
The justices ruled in Zampogna v. Law Enforcement Health Benefits that a nonprofit’s corporate purpose and its authority to take actions must be construed in the least restrictive manner.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
